I guess I'll ask elsewhere. Thanks.

I guess I'll ask elsewhere. Thanks.

the double post was unintentional (bad internet). I apologize for any emotional trauma.

I'll take a stab at answering a few of your questions:

"Would a portfolio of drawings, paintings, and architecture sketches be sufficient for admission? I will work on presentation and quality of course."

You present what you have. You really can't give them a full-fledged architecture portfolio, and they will not expect it from you. It is all about quality and content, not what you technically put in. Would it be sufficient for admission? Depends on the quality of work. Will the chosen modes of representation be a reason for rejecting you? No.


"My main question is, do you think I have what it takes to get into a strong M.Arch program and actually do well?"

Whether you will do well or not in architecture school you can generally figure out very early on. However, it is impossible to judge your aptitude for studio via an online forum. You will notice fairly quickly whether you can get into the types of thinking required. Also, success in arch school is not necessarily representative of your aptitude for the actual profession.

hey man,

just a recommendation for you, obviously you must have a slight interest in economics, so you might find the work of 'shop' architects very interesting, i believe one of the partners has a background in business or economics or something before doing a m.arch 1 at columbia..

anyway there is a really interesting lecture given by him on the gsd webcasts website.

Greg Pasquarelli
http://sorcerer.design.harvard.edu/gsdlectures/f2006/greg.mov

anyway I think you might find this extremely interesting and inspiring...

I'd recommend doing some fashion design at Central St. Martins if this interests you and you have the opportunity to participate in classes. Experience in design outside of architecture can only act to broaden your understanding and skill set. I'd also recommend finding time to intern over the next year, both of these pursuits will give you some advantages in your application process and during your academic journey. Letters of rec. shouldn't be limited to acrchitecture educators.

cardinaldo,

Thank you so much for asking this question! It’s so strange, what you wrote or going through is exactly what I’m going through, it’s almost feels like I wrote this (note to self, must seek dr to est for double-personality thing)
Anyways, thanks 4 asking and I hope people are kind enough to share their ideas with ya :)

You shouldn't be worried. I was a finance major from a much less prestigious university with a lower GPA and I got into a good school.

As for your portfolio you do NOT need nor do they WANT any architectural related stuff in your portfolio.

Send me an email if you want to talk more :)

Thanks for the responses!

The whole grad school process appears rather intimidating and I'm really anxious about the whole application ordeal, having no formal background in architecture and not knowing what to expect or even how to assess my chances of success in school and the profession.
I think I'll do a short studio program somewhere and try to get an internship as per Kirkeron's suggestion to get a better idea of where I stand. It seems like a lot of work to get into a good program, so I'd better get moving. Thanks again for you help and insight!

You should think long and hard about this....given the state of the economy. It may be a while before you would be able to find a job, especially in the residential sector. There are other fields in which you can utilize your creative instincts, yet have a better economic future. (graphics, landscape design, exhibit design, web design, industrial design, planning, etc...)

Hopefully it will be improving by the time you graduate, but you never know, and you could be just waiting for the next downturn.

Architecture is a hard profession to succeed in. Trust me, with a degree in economics from Standford, you will make SO MUCH more money than as an architect.

If you think this is your calling, by all means go for it. There are plenty of 3.5 year M.Arch grad programs which offer a condensed program of study, and look for students of all backgrounds. You shouldn't have any trouble getting in to a decent one. They figure that the students applying to them do not have extensive portfolios.

Keep in mind, the rate of attrition in architecture school is very high. The programs are designed to weed out the boys from the men very quickly. In most programs you will see 15-20% of your classmates leave with in the first few weeks, with another 30% giving up by the end of the first semester. (My freshman undergrad program was designed for this. It admitted 200 students for the first year, but there were only 75 spots for the second.)

I don't mean to discourage you, but it is just a very big change, be sure you are ready for it. Talk to other architecture students and professors before you take the leap. Make sure the types and amounts of work they are doing is in line with what you expect.

Oh, and one more thing,
Expect many sleepless nights....

Aw you guys seem nice. Initially I just wanted to post here because it's late, I'm slap happy and I wanted my name in the top 5, but here's my feedback:

You seem to have a unique opportunity in front of you. I do not want to discourage you from going to school, I am a big fan of academia, certainly; however, would it be presumptuous of me to say that it seems like you may have some money? Stanford, 2 houses, extensive travel, London, New York - these aren't opportunities that many people have. Listen, you don't have to answer that, but the truth is, if you really want to produce architecture, going all the way through school may not satisfy you. It takes a really LONG TIME to become an architect. Like, 10 years. You may go through a few courses and realize that you could design something yourself; hire a licensed architect to review it, perhaps do CDs for it, and stamp it; and then build yourself a nice small condo building or something. This would benefit you in several ways - development is the direction that most architects would go in if they had money, but they usually don't. You'd have your design realized before many of your assumed classmates have even graduated. And as an added bonus, you would not only make money, but you would employ someone who might not have a job otherwise.

I hope you understand I am not trying to be sarcastic, but ... life is short, and the economy sucks, and the applications for grad school might go WAY up this year ... keep your options open. You can certainly get into grad school but do you want to? I'm playing devil's advocate, if you will....

xcarix:
Thanks for your post, it's exactly my dilemma. It’s true that architecture is one of the more demanding paths a person can take in life, that's clear even to me. It's creatively challenging, competitive and not to mention offers debatable financial benefits.
However, regarding the current economic crisis, I don't think I would have much success with a financial career, seeing as many people in the industry lose their jobs on a daily basis and that the industry might cease to exist in its current form all too soon. There is no stability where I am and quite frankly, I'd rather make the fraction of my current salary doing what I love over financial modeling and market speculation for the rest of my life. I realize that I might have had a chance to retire by the time I'm 30, but how would I cope with an early mid-life crisis once I get there? I would want to pursue my passion, but because in my case it would probably be architecture, I would be 40 before I get any good, which might discourage me from taking that road altogether.

I'm 20 and am very aware of the implications of this decision; the risks and uncertainties are high, but I can't find out whether it's the right choice until I make it and commit to it. I know for a fact that money is not the ultimate goal of my life. I'm not saying I have no use for it, it'd be great to have it at all times, but I am more worried about waking up one day and realizing I've missed my chance at becoming a good - maybe great - architect, my lifelong dream. I've had these wake up calls already and I seriously pondered whether studying economics over civil engineering was a right choice. My decision was influenced by money at the time, so I can't say it was an objective one.

At this point, I have no idea if I'll even be a good architect. I have the drive and the stamina, and I like to think the creative potential. I also think that the price of not finding out the answer to that question is lifelong regret. If I fall into the 15% of students who are weeded out in the first weeks, then so be it. I know I'll try my damn hardest to do well and I just have to hope it will be enough to get me to the next stage every time.


WomderK:

That's a perceptive observation and I admit that my parents do have enough resources to sustain a comfortable lifestyle. However, that doesn't make any difference to my current decision, because I will most definitely be facing disinheritance in the nearest future for not coming out the way my parents hoped.

The 10 years you mention aren't necessarily some wasted years of an otherwise happy, carefree life. I may be naive about it, but I'm ready to enjoy the challenges and the journey of becoming an architect. I see is as a time when I get to try and learn so many new things and develop the talents I may have. And I certainly don't mind giving up sleep and seeing daylight for designing something that might become a worthwhile part of the physical world one day. To me that beats spending 100 hours each week making an excel model for some corporate profit-making machine or helping an old lady add another $20 million to her trust fund by shorting Russian stocks.

I've also once given thought to the idea of outsourcing the design process to a professional architect, to implement my amateur ideas through someone else, but that would not give me the same satisfaction, and the money I make from such development projects would be poor consolation when I try to get sleep in some opulent penthouse. Now, I can try to get to that point by way of becoming an architect first, but I can't say that I will be very disappointed if I never reach it.

I may have an erroneous view on the whole situation, but I like to believe that it's possible to go after your dreams, for what you believe will make you happier in the end and to hope that the rest will sort itself out. It's depressing to think that most people never get to their happy place, but I don't think I'm ready to give up on mine.

Dear Cardinaldo...
Have you ever taken any arch courses eleswhere?
I know you wouldn't like it much, CAL has summer design studios that you can sign up. In my summer design studio, there was an art history major from Stanford now works on her March in GSD. It's also a good place to earn a letter of recommendation too.

Holy criminey, did you say you were only 20 years old? And you already have a BA in economics? Well by all means, go for it. You're still young and have plenty of time to make life choices without really screwing yourself!

On a completely unrelated note, has anyone else heard of that 12-year-old surgeon in India?

cardinaldo

There are definitely a few folks in each class (in my case, the GSD) from non-architecture backgrounds. They have to demonstrate potential and passion. It seems you have the latter, your portfolio will need to show the former.

In preparation, I would think less about checking off boxes (you know, acquiring enough or the right preparation) and more about images and narratives that visually compelling. Good architecture is about making it look effortless, so you need to have something that hints at that talent, or suggests you've got the brains and wherewithall to put the complicated together and make it look easy.

Oddly, your personal statement may matter more than with other applicants. You'll need to show passion there. And remember, for a good portfolio, only show the very best. No "I was trying to ..." images. Range, passion and narrative.

Good luck.

a a i b:

Thanks for your suggestions. Could you please elaborate on what would be a visually compelling narrative? To me, a narrative can and usually is confined to a single finished piece, not so much spread over a series of work, even within one theme, if that's what you meant.

I've read on other threads that one should show a process in the portfolio, which I presume would be including the initial sketches showing the thought behind my work and its development. Problem is, my work is not always planned - I often experiment with materials and mediums until I get to the desired result. I don't think I rely on luck, but more on improving my method with each try. Do I show my failed pieces with the final result? Would that be my 'process'?

So, I could potentially present the development of several major themes in my work using different modes, show how I got there, make it all look effortless, but complex and compelling and call it a portfolio? I'm not sure how most of my paintings can hint at a potential in architecture. Just today, I painted this piece and it's a new direction I want to work in. Do I include it with whatever the final result is and hope it makes sense, a narrative, if you will?

I've never been taught or tried to make a portfolio, so I don't know exactly what to do in my case. Any practical suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

Process the way I see it can be thought of in a few different ways.

The most obvious interpretation is the one you brought up - to show the creative process through which you got there. Whether that is through initial sketches or iterative material experimentation is almost irrelevant - you are showing a similar narrative. Initial sketches or "failed pieces" are to some degree the same thing, at least seen in this light.

Another interpretation of process is that you show your thoughts regarding the artwork or architectural space. Instead of showing the creative process, you can represent your thought processes behind the work. This is probably easier for architectural projects, since drawings and models are simply representations in and of themselves. Diagrams and other narrative drawings are good examples of this.

Of course, this is an oversimplifaction - the boundary is never entirely clear. But it is nevertheless an important distinction.

Also, cardinaldo, I like that piece.