Ok so we can expand infrastructure, but its useful lifespan is short. Developments in east London are stressing the Jubilee line. If you've been on a tube train the low curved sides are a godsend to tall people (sarcasm).
I agree that every city has problems and New York isn't perfect, but I like it (that will probably change if I live there). Also the subway line should use better automatic gates and RFID travel cards that don't need to be swiped.
I'm living in one of the so called "underrated" cities. pretty city, cheap housing, good museums, stadiums. but i still have to leave. it's a good city for settling down but no good for young people. can't find an arch lecture to go to in 3 months, can't find interesting activities or groups that are interesting and active.
cities, good or bad points all differs for people.
I'd love to work in London, then it'll make it easier to travel in Europe!
"London (my current home) is so mediocre. The city doesn't actually plan for the distant future and when something is finally built they realise oh fuck its not suitable now.
Also the city isn't willing to try new things, it's too reserved and preoccupied with looking after artefacts from the past. Even when new ideas are realised/proposed they have to be camouflaged to represent the past or there is a complete public outcry at the cost or some other silly reason."
Replace "London" with "New York" and you will have the exact problem that so many New Yorkers have with NYC right now. It's actually quite stylistically conservative in terms of architecture and NIMBYs run the show-everything has to be "contextual" if it's going to be built at all, so we are left with ugly condos for wealthy buyers only that blot the skyline-some of the condos on the West Side around 42nd Street are straight up gross. A lot of the good stuff that gets built is designed by architects from out of town. And projects that would benefit the entire city (new subways, new tunnels for freight and water, affordable housing) never get off the ground or are optimistically scheduled for completion within 20 years or so. It's like the city's priorities are all out of whack and it wants to look good instead of work well for as many people as possible.
odb, i agree that nyc should be able to take criticism from anyone. i only raise the point about being a native new yorker because i think we take for granted certain truths that non-new yorkers fail to realize, inevitably causing them to fault the city.
1. the new york city that you see/read/hear about in movies/books/plays does not actually exist.
2. manhattan is not equal to new york city. new york city is not equal to manhattan.
much of the criticism i am reading seems to be based in the misunderstanding of these two basic observations. people have unreal expectations of new york city, and when they fail to be realized, people say something along the lines "the new york city of today doesn't compare to the new york city of the past." however, ill argue that these perceived faults arise because people's own experiences do not live up to the fabricated mythology of the place. the city's faults do not keep from being happy, rather people fault the city because they are not happy. odb, were you really attracted to nyc because you wanted to own a house and live a slow-paced life? (which you can do in new york)
if i were to move to cincinnati, denver, or any other city mentioned here, i would go there expecting nothing in return. however, i find that hardly to be the case when people move to new york. the things people ask new york to do for them are things they would not ask any other city to do. moreover, they do not take advantage of the opportunities that do exist, if they are situated outside of manhattan or the trendy coast of brooklyn. new york is an enormous city, and has a tremendous amount to offer - a lot of which is free.
also, just another point...odb, have you heard of mayor bloomberg's planyc 2030 initiative? it is a multi-billion dollar effort by new york to prepare new york for future population growth, while repairing aging infrastructure and "greening" its practices and policies....yes the steampipe incident last summer was tragic and inexcusable, as were the recent crane collapses. However, in terms of scale, can you really compare the incredible infrastructure of new york city to any other in the world? maybe a few.
ps. when i say "joke" i mean in terms of scale. aquapura, do not put words into my mouth...i said american cities, not america, and you are taking my statement out of context. i really have a hard time comparing new york to pittsburgh
frem001 I recommend you read "Smoot's Ear"... or a delightful review in the Sept/Oct ArchitectureBoston by an excellent young writer ;) But seriously it chronicles the woesome birth of the metric system and why the measurement systems we use have significance beyond their immediate function. I can mail the magazine to folks for free if anyone's interested. (not the book!)
aquapura - I think i went to a Kentucky Fried Chicken there once. I had to exchange cash for biscuts through a bulletproof glass lazy susan.
I had never done that before.
On the upside, my friend had a sweet apartment for $500/person!
ps the tube is immaculate, as is London! I loved the 2 days I spent there.
Lets talk about future cities - the cities of the next century, who have the room to grow, who arent locked into a late 19th century built environment. That can be urban and suburban at the same time - NY is cool to visit but a lot of its boosters are waxing nostalgic for a bygone urbanity that doesnt really exist anymore.
As much as we yearn for stringing our laundry across the street and going to the corner store we forget these conditions were the result of mass industrialisation and substandard housing for the working poor. These neighborhoods were filthy, dangerous, and worse than any modern day gehto. Drunks, drug addicts, pimps hookers - openly did business under the gas lamps. If you didnt get maimed in an industrial accident, you probably died of the "vapors" or some other environmental illness.
Lets talk about future cities - the cities of the next century, who have the room to grow, who arent locked into a late 19th century built environment. That can be urban and suburban at the same time - NY is cool to visit but a lot of its boosters are waxing nostalgic for a bygone urbanity that doesnt really exist anymore.
As much as we yearn for stringing our laundry across the street and going to the corner store we forget these conditions were the result of mass industrialisation and substandard housing for the working poor. These neighborhoods were filthy, dangerous, and worse than any modern day gehto. Drunks, drug addicts, pimps hookers - openly did business under the gas lamps. If you didnt get maimed in an industrial accident, you probably died of the "vapors" or some other environmental illness.
touches directly on your feeling about dallas
and even talks about nyc
Now I fly out of Laguardia, or out of JFK
and I land at DFW and I drive down LBJ
and the houses and the shopping centers, don't make me afraid
Why they ever did, it's hard now to explain
.. but if you don't live in New York, you won't get blogged about, and you won't know what the cool kids are into and your picture will never be in interwebsites like this or this.
Seriously - can anyone afford not to live in New York.
cono, the KFC on nostrand and fulton? I get chicken there alot, and it does bug me I have to buy my food through perspex.
The funny thing about that neighborhood though is despite the bullet-proof acrylic not a single one of those chicken joints has been robbed according to the locals.
I find real "ghettos" are hard to distinguish. Basically, IMO, if most of your neighbors are unemployed out of the formal economy, your probably living in a ghetto.
Oh, and I have a big, 2br apartment with south facing windows for 650 a person, and I overpaid a little for it.
Oh, and xacto, of course I know central and prospect were designed by Olmstead. BTW, we're you born and raised in NYC? Most of the Born-and-Raised new yorkers I know don't actually live in "the city", but are in north manhattan or the other 4 boros.
A former professor of mine, who runs a small practice in NY was lamenting the fact that the only projects he gets are interiors and exhibition designs. He says that he could leave new york and get more chances to build more buildings, but he wouldn't get the same exposure ...
Do you think that's ok?
Do you think he has the right priorities?
Is it more important to build buildings or let the world know that you are an architect?
i do think that once you stray into the world of high-end interiors and residential it is almost impossible to get out and be taken seriously as an architect of other larger scale building types. i have a few coworkers that worked in new york and came back to the midwest. they had mainly worked on interiors while in nyc, and they really struggle with detailing larger building types.
Weird... I have just the opposite problem. Almost all my experience has been in public buildings (commercial, institutional, transit, and corporate interiors), but I wouldn't mind getting some experience in high-end custom interiors work, either residential and/or hospitality. I guess it's possible to get pigeonholed either way.
lig, that sounds right to me. i think if i moved to nyc, i would have a harder time, given my portfolio, working in a small scale high-end office. not to say you can't get large scale experience in nyc; you may just have to find it at a kpf or gensler.
j-turn, are you being sarcastic? I can't really tell.
evil: i love your idea.
I dream of a future city where most streets are free of cars and you can walk everywhere in less that 15 min. b/c of old school euro density, and they are filled with sunlight (direct & reflected) where streets are useful & interesting networks that respond to communities & residents, rather than gridded mini-highways designed for passing through as fast as possible. Of course in this glorious future city, I can hop in my electric convertible and zip out to the beach whenever I want.
please anyone give some more insight of jafidler's comment
"once you stray into the world of high-end interiors and residential it is almost impossible to get out and be taken seriously as an architect of other larger scale building types."
I only had two years experience at a large architectural firm, I do want to find a small firm and start gaining more all-around experience. but seems it's true that most NY small firms only do interior and residential work. should I just move to Chicago or boston (may have more chances to work on bigger scale archi) and get a balance of what the city offers and my architectural professional development?
The new york scene is really polarized with the big offices on one end and lots and lots of small offices at the other. There's not a lot in between because you don't get a lot of the projects like schools, small office buildings, houses ... etc projects in NYC proper, and that's the sort of work that would normally sustain a midium scale practice.
what jadfidler's saying (i think) is that the experience you get doing high end interiors is really specific, and doesn't really translate to when you start doing bigger buildings with all the stuff like wall sections, enclosure systems ... etc. You don't learn that doing interiors. Also, when you go from working with big budgets to tight budgets, things get harder.
Let me put it this way - at a small high office, you learn how to do a little with a lot (of budget); whereas, most architects are usually struggling to figure out how to do a lot with a little.
"should I just move to Chicago or boston (may have more chances to work on bigger scale archi) and get a balance of what the city offers and my architectural professional development?"
I know nothing about Boston (I live in NYC and apparently I am required to either hate or haugtily disregard Boston) but I thought, based on a few visits, that the Chicago architecture scene was promising-yeah they have the same crappy luxury condo disease that NYC has, but it also seems like smaller firms have more opportunity to do interesting ground up work and clients are willing to take a chance on interesting local designers in a way that does not happen in NYC. But I am operating from a "grass is greener on the other side" mentality maybe. I do think it is true that NYC is all about corporate work and residential interiors and is oriented, more than other cities, towards high end.
odb - Its true that smaller firms in Chicago can get some decent profile work ( The really juicy stuff still goes to Forign Firms - money loves Italiens, French, Spanish and Frank Gehry) but at least in NYC you dont have to sodomized by Stanley Tigerman first
My experience is similar to living in gin’s; and I’ve really enjoyed it. In New York I find you typically deal with high functioning architects, engineers and consultants on the top of their game. You get to work on interesting projects, (all types from institutional educational etc.). And between the The Architectural League, cooper, Columbia and Pratt you could go to a lecture every night if you wanted to. And there’s nothing like the feeling in the morning when you step out the subway on to a mid-town street with all the energy and excitement swirling around you. It really is an amazing feeling. I guess it’s not for some people, but for the people who thrive on it there’s no other place like it.
Also, there’s the Met, Moma, PS1, the studio museum and the Guggenheim all of which I heard are great places to spend an afternoon :)
1. Do you want to be a part of it?
2. Are your vagabond shoes longing to stray?
3. Do you want to wake up in a city that doesn't sleep?
3a. If your answer to last question is yes, then which of the following would you like to be:
a. top of the heap
b. cream of the crop
c. both a and b
Is it really worth it to work in New York?
Ok so we can expand infrastructure, but its useful lifespan is short. Developments in east London are stressing the Jubilee line. If you've been on a tube train the low curved sides are a godsend to tall people (sarcasm).
I agree that every city has problems and New York isn't perfect, but I like it (that will probably change if I live there). Also the subway line should use better automatic gates and RFID travel cards that don't need to be swiped.
I know the least you could do is rebel, how about a tea party in Boston?
I'm living in one of the so called "underrated" cities. pretty city, cheap housing, good museums, stadiums. but i still have to leave. it's a good city for settling down but no good for young people. can't find an arch lecture to go to in 3 months, can't find interesting activities or groups that are interesting and active.
cities, good or bad points all differs for people.
I'd love to work in London, then it'll make it easier to travel in Europe!
"London (my current home) is so mediocre. The city doesn't actually plan for the distant future and when something is finally built they realise oh fuck its not suitable now.
Also the city isn't willing to try new things, it's too reserved and preoccupied with looking after artefacts from the past. Even when new ideas are realised/proposed they have to be camouflaged to represent the past or there is a complete public outcry at the cost or some other silly reason."
Replace "London" with "New York" and you will have the exact problem that so many New Yorkers have with NYC right now. It's actually quite stylistically conservative in terms of architecture and NIMBYs run the show-everything has to be "contextual" if it's going to be built at all, so we are left with ugly condos for wealthy buyers only that blot the skyline-some of the condos on the West Side around 42nd Street are straight up gross. A lot of the good stuff that gets built is designed by architects from out of town. And projects that would benefit the entire city (new subways, new tunnels for freight and water, affordable housing) never get off the ground or are optimistically scheduled for completion within 20 years or so. It's like the city's priorities are all out of whack and it wants to look good instead of work well for as many people as possible.
odb, i agree that nyc should be able to take criticism from anyone. i only raise the point about being a native new yorker because i think we take for granted certain truths that non-new yorkers fail to realize, inevitably causing them to fault the city.
1. the new york city that you see/read/hear about in movies/books/plays does not actually exist.
2. manhattan is not equal to new york city. new york city is not equal to manhattan.
much of the criticism i am reading seems to be based in the misunderstanding of these two basic observations. people have unreal expectations of new york city, and when they fail to be realized, people say something along the lines "the new york city of today doesn't compare to the new york city of the past." however, ill argue that these perceived faults arise because people's own experiences do not live up to the fabricated mythology of the place. the city's faults do not keep from being happy, rather people fault the city because they are not happy. odb, were you really attracted to nyc because you wanted to own a house and live a slow-paced life? (which you can do in new york)
if i were to move to cincinnati, denver, or any other city mentioned here, i would go there expecting nothing in return. however, i find that hardly to be the case when people move to new york. the things people ask new york to do for them are things they would not ask any other city to do. moreover, they do not take advantage of the opportunities that do exist, if they are situated outside of manhattan or the trendy coast of brooklyn. new york is an enormous city, and has a tremendous amount to offer - a lot of which is free.
also, just another point...odb, have you heard of mayor bloomberg's planyc 2030 initiative? it is a multi-billion dollar effort by new york to prepare new york for future population growth, while repairing aging infrastructure and "greening" its practices and policies....yes the steampipe incident last summer was tragic and inexcusable, as were the recent crane collapses. However, in terms of scale, can you really compare the incredible infrastructure of new york city to any other in the world? maybe a few.
ps. when i say "joke" i mean in terms of scale. aquapura, do not put words into my mouth...i said american cities, not america, and you are taking my statement out of context. i really have a hard time comparing new york to pittsburgh
odb, i agree with your last post...as i said, i think new york is great, but i am not complacent.
frem001 I recommend you read "Smoot's Ear"... or a delightful review in the Sept/Oct ArchitectureBoston by an excellent young writer ;) But seriously it chronicles the woesome birth of the metric system and why the measurement systems we use have significance beyond their immediate function. I can mail the magazine to folks for free if anyone's interested. (not the book!)
aquapura - I think i went to a Kentucky Fried Chicken there once. I had to exchange cash for biscuts through a bulletproof glass lazy susan.
I had never done that before.
On the upside, my friend had a sweet apartment for $500/person!
ps the tube is immaculate, as is London! I loved the 2 days I spent there.
I think you've made valid points. In an ideal world I'd divide my time between different cities.
Increases in the price of oil have made visiting the mainland quite expensive.
Personally I see a greater value in using metric measurements when it comes to technical applications, but I'm open to persuasion.
Tokyo has the best transport system in terms of cleanliness and I'm sure navigating it would be quite simple if I was Japanese.
NyC sucks ass
Lets talk about future cities - the cities of the next century, who have the room to grow, who arent locked into a late 19th century built environment. That can be urban and suburban at the same time - NY is cool to visit but a lot of its boosters are waxing nostalgic for a bygone urbanity that doesnt really exist anymore.
As much as we yearn for stringing our laundry across the street and going to the corner store we forget these conditions were the result of mass industrialisation and substandard housing for the working poor. These neighborhoods were filthy, dangerous, and worse than any modern day gehto. Drunks, drug addicts, pimps hookers - openly did business under the gas lamps. If you didnt get maimed in an industrial accident, you probably died of the "vapors" or some other environmental illness.
So anyways
Lets talk about future cities - the cities of the next century, who have the room to grow, who arent locked into a late 19th century built environment. That can be urban and suburban at the same time - NY is cool to visit but a lot of its boosters are waxing nostalgic for a bygone urbanity that doesnt really exist anymore.
As much as we yearn for stringing our laundry across the street and going to the corner store we forget these conditions were the result of mass industrialisation and substandard housing for the working poor. These neighborhoods were filthy, dangerous, and worse than any modern day gehto. Drunks, drug addicts, pimps hookers - openly did business under the gas lamps. If you didnt get maimed in an industrial accident, you probably died of the "vapors" or some other environmental illness.
So anyways
Anybody have any other cities that they would recommend to practice architecture or prefer to live in? Just curious....
Vancouver
architorture:
you need to listen to
"the bullet and big d"
by bishop allen
http://www.bishopallen.com/music/TheBulletAndBigD.mp3
touches directly on your feeling about dallas
and even talks about nyc
Now I fly out of Laguardia, or out of JFK
and I land at DFW and I drive down LBJ
and the houses and the shopping centers, don't make me afraid
Why they ever did, it's hard now to explain
wow. lots of action here. xacto, are you picking on me?
.. but if you don't live in New York, you won't get blogged about, and you won't know what the cool kids are into and your picture will never be in interwebsites like this or this.
Seriously - can anyone afford not to live in New York.
cono, the KFC on nostrand and fulton? I get chicken there alot, and it does bug me I have to buy my food through perspex.
The funny thing about that neighborhood though is despite the bullet-proof acrylic not a single one of those chicken joints has been robbed according to the locals.
I find real "ghettos" are hard to distinguish. Basically, IMO, if most of your neighbors are unemployed out of the formal economy, your probably living in a ghetto.
Oh, and I have a big, 2br apartment with south facing windows for 650 a person, and I overpaid a little for it.
Oh, and xacto, of course I know central and prospect were designed by Olmstead. BTW, we're you born and raised in NYC? Most of the Born-and-Raised new yorkers I know don't actually live in "the city", but are in north manhattan or the other 4 boros.
lol...no strawbeary...didnt even see you had posted...nothing personal
A former professor of mine, who runs a small practice in NY was lamenting the fact that the only projects he gets are interiors and exhibition designs. He says that he could leave new york and get more chances to build more buildings, but he wouldn't get the same exposure ...
Do you think that's ok?
Do you think he has the right priorities?
Is it more important to build buildings or let the world know that you are an architect?
What do you think?
i do think that once you stray into the world of high-end interiors and residential it is almost impossible to get out and be taken seriously as an architect of other larger scale building types. i have a few coworkers that worked in new york and came back to the midwest. they had mainly worked on interiors while in nyc, and they really struggle with detailing larger building types.
Weird... I have just the opposite problem. Almost all my experience has been in public buildings (commercial, institutional, transit, and corporate interiors), but I wouldn't mind getting some experience in high-end custom interiors work, either residential and/or hospitality. I guess it's possible to get pigeonholed either way.
lig, that sounds right to me. i think if i moved to nyc, i would have a harder time, given my portfolio, working in a small scale high-end office. not to say you can't get large scale experience in nyc; you may just have to find it at a kpf or gensler.
j-turn, are you being sarcastic? I can't really tell.
evil: i love your idea.
I dream of a future city where most streets are free of cars and you can walk everywhere in less that 15 min. b/c of old school euro density, and they are filled with sunlight (direct & reflected) where streets are useful & interesting networks that respond to communities & residents, rather than gridded mini-highways designed for passing through as fast as possible. Of course in this glorious future city, I can hop in my electric convertible and zip out to the beach whenever I want.
Its kind of a tall order.
con - move to amsterdam, seriously
please anyone give some more insight of jafidler's comment
"once you stray into the world of high-end interiors and residential it is almost impossible to get out and be taken seriously as an architect of other larger scale building types."
I only had two years experience at a large architectural firm, I do want to find a small firm and start gaining more all-around experience. but seems it's true that most NY small firms only do interior and residential work. should I just move to Chicago or boston (may have more chances to work on bigger scale archi) and get a balance of what the city offers and my architectural professional development?
thanks in advance!!!
The new york scene is really polarized with the big offices on one end and lots and lots of small offices at the other. There's not a lot in between because you don't get a lot of the projects like schools, small office buildings, houses ... etc projects in NYC proper, and that's the sort of work that would normally sustain a midium scale practice.
what jadfidler's saying (i think) is that the experience you get doing high end interiors is really specific, and doesn't really translate to when you start doing bigger buildings with all the stuff like wall sections, enclosure systems ... etc. You don't learn that doing interiors. Also, when you go from working with big budgets to tight budgets, things get harder.
Let me put it this way - at a small high office, you learn how to do a little with a lot (of budget); whereas, most architects are usually struggling to figure out how to do a lot with a little.
xacto, Okay, just checking. This is the second time you have quoted me in a week!
"should I just move to Chicago or boston (may have more chances to work on bigger scale archi) and get a balance of what the city offers and my architectural professional development?"
I know nothing about Boston (I live in NYC and apparently I am required to either hate or haugtily disregard Boston) but I thought, based on a few visits, that the Chicago architecture scene was promising-yeah they have the same crappy luxury condo disease that NYC has, but it also seems like smaller firms have more opportunity to do interesting ground up work and clients are willing to take a chance on interesting local designers in a way that does not happen in NYC. But I am operating from a "grass is greener on the other side" mentality maybe. I do think it is true that NYC is all about corporate work and residential interiors and is oriented, more than other cities, towards high end.
odb - Its true that smaller firms in Chicago can get some decent profile work ( The really juicy stuff still goes to Forign Firms - money loves Italiens, French, Spanish and Frank Gehry) but at least in NYC you dont have to sodomized by Stanley Tigerman first
My experience is similar to living in gin’s; and I’ve really enjoyed it. In New York I find you typically deal with high functioning architects, engineers and consultants on the top of their game. You get to work on interesting projects, (all types from institutional educational etc.). And between the The Architectural League, cooper, Columbia and Pratt you could go to a lecture every night if you wanted to. And there’s nothing like the feeling in the morning when you step out the subway on to a mid-town street with all the energy and excitement swirling around you. It really is an amazing feeling. I guess it’s not for some people, but for the people who thrive on it there’s no other place like it.
Also, there’s the Met, Moma, PS1, the studio museum and the Guggenheim all of which I heard are great places to spend an afternoon :)
strawbeary...coincidence i guess...you were not alone in that sentiment...again, no hard feelings...
Here's the fundamental question:
1. Do you want to be a part of it?
2. Are your vagabond shoes longing to stray?
3. Do you want to wake up in a city that doesn't sleep?
3a. If your answer to last question is yes, then which of the following would you like to be:
a. top of the heap
b. cream of the crop
c. both a and b
C'mon, it's new york baby!
Or maybe you're feeling more like ...
New York, I Love You
But you're bringing me down
Like a rat in a cage
Pulling minimum wage
New York, I Love You
But you're bringing me down
New York, you're safer
And you're wasting my time
Our records all show
You are filthy but fine
But they shuttered your stores
When you opened the doors
To the cops who were bored
Once they'd run out of crime
New York, you're perfect
Don't please don't change a thing
Your mild billionaire mayor's
Now convinced he's a king
So the boring collect
I mean all disrespect
In the neighborhood bars
I'd once dreamt I would drink
New York, I Love You
But you're freaking me out
There's a ton of the twist
But we're fresh out of shout
Like a death in the hall
That you hear through your wall
New York, I Love You
But you're freaking me out
New York, I Love You
But you're bringing me down
New York, I Love You
But you're bringing me down
Like a death of the heart
Jesus, where do I start?
But you're still the one pool
Where I'd happily drown
And oh.. Take me off your mailing list
For kids that think it still exists
Yes, for those who think it still exists
Maybe I'm wrong
And maybe you're right
Maybe I'm wrong
And myabe you're right
Maybe you're right
Maybe I'm wrong
And just maybe you're right
And Oh..
Maybe mother told you true
And they're always be something there for you
And you'll never be alone
But maybe she's wrong
And maybe I'm right
And just maybe she's wrong
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.