you should avoid notre dame football.

that is all.

FWIW, I have a co-worker who used to work in one of those firms that does very sleek, minimalist high-end residential design... The type of stuff where all the millwork fits together with the tightest tolerances, and there's not a single arbitrary line or angle in the entire project, like the super-high-end stuff you see in Dwell. My co-worker said that most of the employees in that firm didn't come from schools like Yale or GSD, but rather from schools like Notre Dame and Catholic University, where hand drawing and classical detailing has been pounded into their heads for the past 3-5 years. In this firm's experience, those grads are apparently the only ones who are properly anal about detailing.

No kidding, archnewbie: This is what Living in Gin posted several days ago on Thread Central, before you put this question up:

One of my co-workers made an interesting observation a while ago: He used to work in one of those firms that does very sleek, minimalist high-end residential design... The type of stuff where all the millwork fits together with the tightest tolerances, and there's not a single arbitrary line or angle in the entire project. If their work were any more minimalist, it would disappear entirely. My co-worker said that most of the employees in that firm didn't come from schools like Yale or GSD, but rather from schools like Notre Dame and Catholic University, where hand drawing and classical detailing has been pounded into their heads for the past five years. Apparently this firm found that they're the only ones who really know how to design proper details.

I had to go look for it while he posted the above....

(LiG, don't ever worry that people don't read what you post!)

Well, not everybody reads Thread Central, so I thought it was worth re-posting here.

LIG,

Ching went to Notre Dame. You know, the guy with the drawing books.

I know one of his colleagues and his stuff is in major museums. He can really draft.

make:

...he can draft AND figure out how to sell you 3 books instead of just one, with 60% overlap in information between them.

Building Construction Illustrated
Visual Dictionary of Arch.
Building Codes Illustrated

are more or less the same book, with slightly different information from one to the other.

Pod,

I wish I could that!

The gentleman I know (Ching's classmate) isn't doing Architecture anymore. But his drawing skills are extraordinary. He tells me that everyone there could draft like him. It was the baseline at Notre Dame.

But this was 1968.

Is Bill Westfall still teaching at ND? Really f'ing traditional, but absolutely brilliant in ways you might not expect. Quite different from Koolhaas, etc., but practically, things in common. ish.

notre dame football is awesome. coach weis is a genius & jimmy clausen is just downright dreamy.





oh...and like golden domes... hell yes!

touchdown jesus!

I would have a hard time justifying 3 years of my life in a program that doesn't appeal to me, regardless of cost.

That's just my two cents.

Catholics dont believe in Jesus as God - I never understood the that about Notre Dame. God is 1. Then Jesus and the Holy Spirit. Jesus isnt the top dog to Catholics. Mary is like the referee. Go to her on appeals. At least thats my understanding, and I went to Catholic school.

Why would you apply to a place that you really would have to question attending? I know a couple of people who went to notre dame. one guy was a professor and practicing architect who's work wasn't "classical" or "traditional" at all. Also, I had a job when I lived up there by Notre Dame and before I worked there they were always talking about this woman who had graduated from N.D, who couldn't do anything. Of course, I am sure they say that about me now.

Notre Dame done messed up when they got all sanctimonious about this guy:

vado - when I was in the process of applying, I didn't have the same sort of design philosophy that I have now. I know it wasn't that long ago, but it's early in my career and I'm very impressionable :) And since I was a classical studies major for my undergrad, I thought Notre Dame would be a safe bet for acceptance (I guess I was right). I'm interning at a great small residential firm and the more I learn, the more I'm drawn away from a strictly traditional design philosophy.

Good program, capable grads. The only thing I would avoid is any priests that smell like theyve been drinking. Your ass will thank me.

Avoid Notre Dame at all cost.

hey at least they have a philosophy albeit the philosophy of superficial architectural grammar.

med., do you have any reasoning behind that opinion?

I think it's not uncommon to spend at least SOME time in school figuring out what you DON'T want to do. As far as I know, ND has a quite reputable program, albeit one with a certain philosophical bent that might not be what you see in your future.

But getting a free education - at a good, not only acceptable, school - will give you a lot of freedom to keep exploring your ideas after you graduate.

If you change your mind a year in, at least you won't have spent any money, only time!

actually learning old school presentation techniques are actually desirable. developers love those renderings containing kids with balloons.

high end residential firms (especially the traditional style ones) are the ones that will pay you the humongous bucks fyi. i have a friend who's only been there for 5 yrs. and is making 6 figures. he didn't graduate from notre dame but i know a few n.d. grads that are working there, prolly w/simliar salary.

I got to walk through there a couple years ago, I was on campus for a friends dissertation, and I was floored by the watercolor sections and general mastery of presentation. Theres something to be said for that. Its not like they make you go out and build coffered barrel vaults everywhere.

and now ladies and gentlemen i give you the groin vault.

you should go just for This!

For all the resemblance that education has to practice in this profession, I can't see why it would hurt you to study under the Notre Dame Classical regime. Good architecture is about being able to think critically and convey your ideas, and nothing is better at enabling that than a liberal arts education. When you are done thinking, a rigorous process can be clad in any stylistic idiom you like - even modernism.

oh i forgot about this bit regarding N.D.andThePresident...

I don't think this has ever been true, and especially will not be in the future.

However, while I think the idea that Classical architecture (or the Classics) in general holds greater import than other parts of our history/tradition is short-sighted, I do think that traditional architecture, whether high-architecture or vernacular buildings, and the formation of cities of the past several millennia are important no matter what style you operate in. There is something nice about an arcade, but it doesn't matter if the columns are Ionic or I-beams. I think traditional architecture is excellent at informing contemporary architecture, but I'd beware if Notre Dame expects you to execute and plans to train you in strict Classical forms and style, because that has no constructive place in contemporary society in my mind.

I was just playing around. I meant to say "avoid Notre Dame football" at all costs. Whoops.

But is it just me, or do Notre Dame recruiters go from state-to-state picking the top ten biggest assholes to bring into that school?

;)

And furthermore, the last great piece of architecture other than (Notre Dame stadium of course) is the Pantheon or something like that. Seriously, they will vehemently stand by that with an overall sense of aggressive mobilization and bellicosity.

From the Notre Dame Architecture Website---Rejecting tradition or launching a radical transformation at its expense as occurs in most other schools of architecture ill equips a person to use his or her God-given gifts to make the built world a better place for everyone. Such an education deprives a person of the inexhaustible fund of experience tradition makes available for guiding leaders. Tradition is much broader than classicism. Classicism is only the narrowest, highest peak of achievement standing out above the broad plain of tradition, an inspirational example of the best to be sure, but an isolated peak nonetheless. No plain, no peak. We can live on the plain, but a peak is a rather narrow roost.


From Rudolf Wittkower-- Bernini's bold departure from the traditioanl form of baldacchinos-in the past often temple like architectural structures had an immediate and lasting effect.

Also,

-In other words Borromini had thrown overborad the classical anthropormorphic conception of architecture which since Brunelleschi's days had been implicitly accepted.

So, one hand there is this argument for studying "classical" architecture as a rejection of other types without acknowledging the inherent rivalries, disagreements and revolutions that occured within the system they are advocating.

archnewbie,

I did my undergraduate at ND and, at first upon entering the working world, I felt that maybe all that classical training wasn't worth it. Then, I changed my mind.

When I look at the fancy computer renderings and sleek, cold designs that are products of other - more contemporary - architecture schools I am impressed but not inspired. Anyone can do that.

Studying the classics won't brain-wash you into a boring, droning, traditionalist, or launch you into a career designing cheap Palladian knock-offs for rich people. Just like any other education, it's a base. And a damn good one. Plus, you get to study in Rome. Studio is two blocks from the Pantheon. Even the uber-mods can respect that.

I haven't working on a single, "classical" building since graduating but my education is definitely relevant in everything I do. Even as an intern I can claim my own designs in several built projects. I was given leeway to work on my own first because of the school on my CV, but now because of the obvious design capabilities I acquired during my studies there.

In national surveys, employers list Notre Dame in the top 10 for schools producing their best designers. Every year.

Obviously, if you have a preference for attending a different school, go there. Being unhappy is not worth any amount of money. But don't eliminate Notre Dame based solely on the "classical bend." Traditional theories are used as a basis for good design, not as the rule.

Best of luck!

If you dont like traditional work, then dont do it. Its really not worth it. I took a job at a firm doing "traditional" work right out of school, and rationalized doing so with all of the usual stuff: learn new things, broaden my the way I think about design, more money, just put in a year or two, yada yada... I was miserable there. Moved to a much more interesting firm, less money, more hours, more stress...but love it because im doing work I want to do.

Traditional work's fine...but seriously, ask yourself, do you want to detail f'ing newel posts?

TheVillan - the question here is about graduate school, not a job with a "traditional" firm.

In school, you're certainly not going to spend any amount of time detailing newel posts. Notre Dame provides it's students with an education in the most time-enduring practices of architecture; practices and realms of thought which have sadly been dropped from many academic arenas in the past few decades. Studying at ND is about establishing an approach to design based on firmitas, utilitas, venustas and then applying these ideals to current problems.

All 'modern,' 'contemporary,' architecture derives itself from or responds to 'classical' architectural ideals; so, why not study the foundation of architecture along with its' newer interpretations? It would be like getting a Master's in Literature without studying anything written prior to 1950.

I would not recommend attending Notre Dame for both undergrad and graduate study but I would say the same for any school. If you attended a more typical undergraduate program, I suggest that Notre Dame is a great way to broaden your education.

Right, graduate school...not a job...MORE of a reason to avoid getting into something you're not entirely into (in his case, traditional/classical stuff). At a job you can simply leave, with a grad program you're not that invested in philosophically you're going to be coming out of school with a portfolio full of Beaux arts plans, when what you really want to be doing is UNstudio stuff. Dont get me wrong, Im not in ANY way trying to put down classical arch...just warning him not to get into something hes not invested in on an emotional level, because I do believe in the long haul it makes a difference. I would suggest the same thing to someone wanting to do classical stuff, but deciding on Columbia.

GreenPen, I get what you're saying, and agree with much of it--traditional architecture gives you a lot to base your work on, and if we're willing to accept that traditional architecture beyond classicism can be included, what you're studying is the breadth of built history. That is under-taught, if not passed over, at most schools. Shiny, blob architecture does not prepare students to do practical design, and in my mind, is of little value to society as a whole. Still, citing Vetruvius as the best and most appropriate source in architecture is like citing Virgil as the best and most appropriate source for literature. Oldest does not make best, and Latin and Greek are not the only basis for western civilization--what about the Norse/Scandinavians, or the Germanic/Celts, what about the growing eastern influence? My issue is not with tradition architecture--I think it should be taught, and good traditionally informed architecture can be wonderful whether it is vernacular/historicist or modern--but with this idea in (old guard) academia that classicism in any field is the basis of our civilization, or as Notre Dame puts it, the peak. New classical architecture is almost always inherently pastiche, and furthermore, detached from the way we live our lives. A good education in the traditional building and design methods, and the vast history of the built world, on the other hand, can be an excellent (perhaps unbeatable) place from which to create something new, but relatable.

So without knowing much about the ND program, newbie, I'd ask to know if you'll be learning a vast array of architectural styles, movements, history and theory, and allowed to operate and design freely, or if you'll be asked to adhere to a certain philosophy in your design.

Villan - interesting thought - Columbia is where I'm headed next...
As a graduate, I feel it is important explore an academic atmosphere that is much different, albeit complimentary, to my undergraduate experience.

Frank – your question is precisely what I am attempting to answer – a Notre Dame education is not a narrow minded attempt to force classical architecture into a new age. Students are encouraged to understand the vast array of architectural practices and theories – of which, “classical” happens to have been most enduring. I reference Vitruvius not because he is the most relevant architectural writer, but because he happens to be one of the oldest and my point is that even the most ancient ideas are not necessarily antiquated. Notre Dame is about learning from the theories that produced the world’s most beautiful, functional and enduring buildings, and exploring whether the best of these ideas apply to modern challenges.

The Pantheon functional? The roof leaks.

GP, yeah im planning on apply to grad schools next go around also. Finding a well rounded school is my top priority. And I dont claim to know much about columbia or ND...i'm just using them as examples.

I think Notre Dame and Columbia are probably about as polar-opposite from one another as you can get... Attending the former for undergrad and the latter for grad school would certainly make for a broad educational experience.

Don't pass up studying what you want because you're skerred of debt.. debt is the american way...

do not go to there. you will not have a well rounded education.

I worry about how future colleagues will react to your having gone to ND, I notice elitism at times among the ...well, elite... and I wonder if you would be putting yourself out of a club.

My school was very close to the ND school in Rome, and sometimes we had mixed reviews. I would say that our professors and students did not really take the ND students very seriously.

silverlake, i'm sorry but that's one of the most irresponsible thing one can say.